Jump to content
Coronavirus topics renamed and some locked. No new topics. ×
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

74 Excellent

About benl

  • Rank
    MF Junior Member
  • Birthday 04/16/1989

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Depends how old you are, but the schedule of vaccinations is here.
  2. This guy was a total plonker, he upset and undervalued the work of a lot of doctors. Profit seems to be his priority. Can't say he'll be missed. Pulse article on his resignation.
  3. Totally misread it, ignore my blind eyes
  4. As long as the business case wasn't prepared by Ian Longworth, because we all know how those turn out.
  5. Didn't M&S plan to bring food in by plane once using a C-130? I thought they only needed a rough strip. Not quite the Berlin airlift but still possible.
  6. It feels a bit like Shoprite getting upset because it wasn't a commercial success. Whilst only a personal opinion, it has always felt like they have used it as a placeholder. Closing the cafe hasn't helped the alcove area as the thoroughfare has just become a shelter. The countless rebranding exercises and somewhat disorganised interior can't have helped IMO. Lots of low cost supermarkets don't have parking in the UK, perhaps catering to their demographic (Fulton's, Heron, and often Aldi and Lidl).
  7. benl

    Speeding Fine

    The 3FM story seems a little different. I wonder which is correct, attending a stabbing or a meeting following such an event.
  8. I think in many Nordic countries you pay before you see a clinician. It's about £10 for a GP appointment and £30 for an A&E or out of hours service. In Sweden, there is an annual cap on the cost but this depends on the administrative region, so in Stockholm after you've paid £100 in a year all services become free. Personally, I wonder if this is more of a barrier in dissuading those who are reluctant to visit rather than frequent fliers. There seems to be a mantra of saying the service is underfunded but is it really, I think that depends on what our expectations are. I wonder if the Isle of Man should focus more on cost-effective medicine, accepting that some of the novel cancer drugs don't provide a great return for the investment, particularly for quality of life. I think there needs to be an honest discussion about what people want or are willing to pay for. I don't think, in my opinion, that a semi privatisation is equitable and risks driving social inequalities which I suspect are already quite prominent. I don't think the Island will ever win the pay battle for locum doctors, a shortage in the UK, isolated location and no training posts beyond basic training all limit recruitment. That or propose at least secondary care is run by an NHS trust in the UK so staff can rotate through and services can be shared (I suspect this would never be palatable as people hate travelling Douglas-Ramsey as it is). I suspect another review really doesn't seem like the best idea, how many of the west mids suggestions have been acted upon?
  9. Apologies, I cross-read with Humulin R. I think these figures must be per wholesale unit, and the pre-tax price I've seen from this vaccine is around £4.50, so your figure makes more sense. I suspect some of the monoclonal antibodies will be sold in single units because of their price and limited use e.g. Ustekinumab . I'd guess these figures also only cover the hospital rather than primary care where cheap drugs prescribed more frequently probably constitute a large proportion of the expense. Looks like a communication misfire from DHSC.
  10. Surely these figures can't be correct, the BNF lists the prices per individual dosage of Imuvac as £6.59, I wonder if the person preparing this has looked at the wholesale units rather than individual items. I can't see them only ordering 7 flu vaccines and also I'd suspect many of these drugs are used in far greater than single figure quantities. Lookings like a poor response to a badly worded question.
  11. When I listened to his speech I thought the underlying argument was the abuse of science, selecting only papers (namely Freemantle et al.) that supported his viewpoint and negating those that said anything to the contrary. This undermines scientific principles and he attributes it to the 'post-truth' state of the world. I think he is reasonably well qualified to make those points being a world-leading scientist. SH even attacks the NHS saying there is a need for 7-day services, but the changes to be made should be based on a body of evidence, not just single studies. Again, I think these are fair points, it's only more political when he says the extension of services must be resourced. From friends who have worked at Addenbrooke's SH has been a patient advocate to improve services. He's seen his fair share of healthcare and I guess this also makes him more qualified than most to comment. JH position is a poison chalice. The NHS probably is underfunded relative to expectations but no one has the hunger to challenge the latter part. He's unpopular but if he's replaced it will look like a victory to the BMA and look like the Conservative Party are acknowledging they disagree with his decisions. Short of an economic catastrophe, I don't think any party would truly dismantle the NHS, it would be political suicide, though the river does erode the mountain.
  12. There is actually evidence that we're living longer, but more recently the rate has slowed (http://www.instituteofhealthequity.org/about-our-work/marmot-indicators-release-2017). The increase in life expectancy has been attributed to declines in smoking and cardiovascular disease. I think there is a risk of those in manual occupations being unfairly punished with rising life expectancies as social inequalities grow. My other concern would be if retirement ages increase, does it not make it harder for the younger generations to find work? Just because people retire later doesn't mean there are more jobs, just that people stay in their jobs for longer.
  13. You really would hope that someone in seemingly knowledgeable position wouldn't be stupid enough to use his/her own name and address when posting a class B drug.
  14. I'm not quite sure I understand your first argument. I accept that we're talking about the simplified version of prevention and causation etc rather than the hyper correct epidemiological terminology. That said, I think you could argue that physical activity prevents such illnesses by reducing the overall risk/odds ratio of developing the conditions listed. The subsequent consequence of lower odds is that fewer would develop the disease of interest calculable by the population attributable fraction. I'm sure the number needed to treat at a certain threshold is high but on a population level this will still result in large benefits. I completely agree that you can't do double blind trials in public health, but you can perform randomised control trials which equally distributes confounding factors. Many of the papers listed in the Canadian review were randomised. I'd say you can never really prove a concept like this but I'd say it meets many of the Bradford Hill criteria. I think what they are addressing here is physical activity, not exercise (which has to be planned and structured). Overall, I think behaviour change is poorly understood and is typically expensive (also not my area of expertise so willing to be corrected). Nudges do work and several people may well have changed their actions after simply reading this thread, though they were likely quite motivated prior. Public health always feels a bit patronising, like your mum telling you to take your coat, because it addresses a problem before it happens or impacts on liberties. That said, nobody likes being told that their ill health is their fault, we'd all happily adopt the sick role and then complain about waiting times and costs. I agree on the assertion of health inequalities. Maybe the DOI would be better using their resources to actually assess the health impact of their major projects. This really didn't seem to be considered with the prom, perhaps the island's largest recreational facility (my objections still aren't as strong as some of my family members, we all know who I mean). Removing parking spaces definitely helps, but I can already imagine the threads on here. PS sorry to all of you who bothered to read this and don't really care.
  15. I agree, yes. I know it's frustrating but isn't this the type of thing that's worth submitting to the consultation? I mean for safety, maybe someone has a suggestion for improving legislation that encourages cycling safety (I await the response, make cyclists pay insurance). As with the others, yes the weather is fecking horrible and cycling/walking is never going to be favourable. Lack of routing can surely be addressed in the consultation, surely if enough people favour certain routes etc it would show where to focus resources. It might even identify the need for a new crossing or something relatively cheap (though I'm sure the DOI will find a way to make this cost £1million and take 6,852 weeks). Isn't there a tax rebate scheme now with cycling? So it does look like there doing something, even if it's just making people angry enough to think about it.
  • Create New...